Quote from kut2k2:
I tuned out virtually every sermon I sat through when I was Christian. So holding me responsible for anything the pastor said would have been ridiculous. Reverend Wright wasn't working for Obama or preaching in Obama's name, so your analogy to racist screeds published in Ron Paul's very own newsletter is a failure.My argument wasn't against abortion, it was against the hypocrisy of calling oneself a libertarian and being against abortion. There is no such thing as a "anti-choice libertarian." I used to be a libertarian so I know about these things. Ron Paul is a conservative pretending to be a libertarian, which makes him a liar. Case closed.
Lots of people go to church because it's expected of them, not because they're fervent believers. It's not a crime. Obama denounced Reverend Wright's hostile speeches. The Reverend Wright issue is over, settled back in 2008. All Paul has said is that he didn't know what was being published in his very own personal newsletter, which is ridiculous.Quote from rew:
Why did you attend the sermons at all if you just tuned them out? Unless you were a child being dragged there by your parents I can't imagine why. Obama attended Reverend Wright's church as an adult, for nearly 20 years. I presume he did so to listen to the sermons, or to discuss things with the Reverend, as otherwise he must really love to waste his time and be bored.
You have no good reasoning on this issue. Murder is a blatant infringement on the rights of the victim. If you're claiming abortion is ipso facto murder, this is clearly a matter of great dispute and the USA has decided in the majority that abortion in the first two trimesters is NOT murder.Quote from rew:
By your reasoning anybody against murder isn't a real libertarian, because that would infringe on a person's ability to choose. After all, some people choose to murder. So unless you favored legalizing murder you were a phony anti-choice libertarian.
In other words, he couldn't multitask even when he was a younger and more vigorous man. Why would anybody want an older, frailer version of *that* guy in the Oval Office? What, was a gun pointed at his head, forcing him to publish newsletters "at a time when he was putting in long hours as a doctor"? That dog won't hunt.Quote from rew:
Ron Paul's great sin was failing to exercise adequate editorial control over some newsletters with his name on them at a time when he was putting in long hours as a doctor.
Quote from kut2k2:
Lots of people go to church because it's expected of them, not because they're fervent believers. It's not a crime. Obama denounced Reverend Wright's hostile speeches. The Reverend Wright issue is over, settled back in 2008. All Paul has said is that he didn't know what was being published in his very own personal newsletter, which is ridiculous.
You have no good reasoning on this issue. Murder is a blatant infringement on the rights of the victim. If you're claiming abortion is ipso facto murder, this is clearly a matter of great dispute and the USA has decided in the majority that abortion in the first two trimesters is NOT murder.
Try to keep your apples separated from your oranges.
In other words, he couldn't multitask even when he was a younger and more vigorous man. Why would anybody want an older, frailer version of *that* guy in the Oval Office? What, was a gun pointed at his head, forcing him to publish newsletters "at a time when he was putting in long hours as a doctor"? That dog won't hunt.